|
Post by johneaztec on Aug 15, 2023 13:16:25 GMT -8
Can't Trump merely say that he thought/heard the voting was rigged there, and he simply wanted the person to find the rigged votes?
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Aug 15, 2023 13:18:02 GMT -8
Can't Trump merely say that he thought/heard the voting was rigged there, and he simply wanted the person to find the rigged votes? That's....a crime. Read the indictment.
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Aug 15, 2023 13:20:39 GMT -8
Can't Trump merely say that he thought/heard the voting was rigged there, and he simply wanted the person to find the rigged votes? That's....a crime. Read the indictment. Rigging votes? Yes, that's a crime if it happened. Doesn't seem as though it did. But, it seems as though you're saying to ask someone to find those rigged votes is a crime, as well. That seems sketchy, but ok. I'll read the indictment in full.
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Aug 15, 2023 13:36:48 GMT -8
That's....a crime. Read the indictment. Rigging votes? Yes, that's a crime if it happened. Doesn't seem as though it did. But, it seems as though you're saying to ask someone to find those rigged votes is a crime, as well. That seems sketchy, but ok. I'll read the indictment in full. First, let's not mischaracterize events. There were no "rigged" votes. Secondly, pressuring the Secretary of State to overturn the election and threatening them with criminal investigation is, in fact, not legal. The phone call is even listed in the indictment. What's sketchy is wherever you're getting information from that is obviously false. The actual indictment illustrates a far-reaching conspiracy to overturn the election by a variety of means. Tampering with election equipment. Nominating fake electors. Threatening public officials. This is weeks after the fact that Trump was aware he had lost the election and has been corroborated by many witnesses in testimony. This is a component called mens rea, signifying criminal intent.
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Aug 15, 2023 13:38:21 GMT -8
I edited my initial post saying that I know it wasn't rigged, but was just wondering if Trump certainly felt that it was, then is it still a crime to ask to find the rigged votes. You answered my question. Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Aug 15, 2023 13:43:13 GMT -8
I edited my initial post saying that I know it wasn't rigged, but was just wondering if Trump certainly felt that it was, then is it still a crime to ask to find the rigged votes. You answered my question. Thank you. Still a crime and lends to the furtherance of the conspiracy, which is why so many people were indicted beyond Trump himself. Stretches across multiple states.
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Aug 15, 2023 13:49:10 GMT -8
Meadows is acting fast.
Like really, really fast.
But this isn't going to work.
|
|
|
Post by Fishn'Aztec on Aug 15, 2023 14:39:40 GMT -8
Can't Trump merely say that he thought/heard the voting was rigged there, and he simply wanted the person to find the rigged votes? Uh, no he insisted the election was rigged and he asked Raffensperger to find the 11,780 votes he needed to win Georgia. He also was complicit in harassing the 2 female voting officials. Most likely he turned his lap dog Rudy on them and he defamed them.
|
|
|
Post by The Aztec Panther on Aug 15, 2023 14:48:09 GMT -8
I just simply do not understand why some people want to give Trump the benefit of the doubt. He's literally one of the worst people to ever hold office in this country. A total narcissistic, arrogant, stupid, foolish, condescending scumbag who put himself above democracy itself!
How people can want to give him ANY benefit of the doubt after all he's done and said is beyond me.
He's been a scumbag for decades, but once he got elected he thought he was Emperor, not President. He believed he could do anything he wanted to do without consequences. Even people who worked in his adminstration said they had to fight to rein him in from doing incredibly, devastatingly bad things to our country.
If it were anyone else he'd have been convicted already and would be serving multiple life sentences for the stuff he's pulled.
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Aug 15, 2023 16:01:47 GMT -8
I just simply do not understand why some people want to give Trump the benefit of the doubt. He's literally one of the worst people to ever hold office in this country. A total narcissistic, arrogant, stupid, foolish, condescending scumbag who put himself above democracy itself! How people can want to give him ANY benefit of the doubt after all he's done and said is beyond me. He's been a scumbag for decades, but once he got elected he thought he was Emperor, not President. He believed he could do anything he wanted to do without consequences. Even people who worked in his adminstration said they had to fight to rein him in from doing incredibly, devastatingly bad things to our country. If it were anyone else he'd have been convicted already and would be serving multiple life sentences for the stuff he's pulled. Personally, I wasn't giving him the benefit of the doubt. I was simply wondering if the reason that I mentioned could lead him to a not guilty verdict. Just thinking out loud. I absolutely want any, and all corrupt politicians to be held accountable.
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Aug 15, 2023 16:28:56 GMT -8
I just simply do not understand why some people want to give Trump the benefit of the doubt. He's literally one of the worst people to ever hold office in this country. A total narcissistic, arrogant, stupid, foolish, condescending scumbag who put himself above democracy itself! How people can want to give him ANY benefit of the doubt after all he's done and said is beyond me. He's been a scumbag for decades, but once he got elected he thought he was Emperor, not President. He believed he could do anything he wanted to do without consequences. Even people who worked in his adminstration said they had to fight to rein him in from doing incredibly, devastatingly bad things to our country. If it were anyone else he'd have been convicted already and would be serving multiple life sentences for the stuff he's pulled. Personally, I wasn't giving him the benefit of the doubt. I was simply wondering if the reason that I mentioned could lead him to a not guilty verdict. Just thinking out loud. I absolutely want any, and all corrupt politicians to be held accountable. And where did that reason come from?
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Aug 15, 2023 17:00:51 GMT -8
Personally, I wasn't giving him the benefit of the doubt. I was simply wondering if the reason that I mentioned could lead him to a not guilty verdict. Just thinking out loud. I absolutely want any, and all corrupt politicians to be held accountable. And where did that reason come from? I heard it on the radio while driving.
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Aug 15, 2023 17:16:29 GMT -8
And where did that reason come from? I heard it on the radio while driving. Conservative radio. Gotta love it.
|
|
|
Post by uwphoto on Aug 15, 2023 17:40:31 GMT -8
I edited my initial post saying that I know it wasn't rigged, but was just wondering if Trump certainly felt that it was, then is it still a crime to ask to find the rigged votes. You answered my question. Thank you. John, this is what you need to remember. trump was planting the seed "If I lose it's rigged" long before the 2020 election. This guy is the master manipulator. Nothing he does is innocent, or I didn't know. He is the most insidious danger to America in history. He loves conflict and anarchy. Thats how he makes his gains. You think he gives a f x x x about Maui? No it's just a manipulative blame game with him. If half the country killed each other, he wouldn't give a f x x x . Name one time he's apologized, showed empathy, or showed humanity in his life? Cancer, cancer cancer.
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Aug 15, 2023 17:46:40 GMT -8
I heard it on the radio while driving. Conservative radio. Gotta love it. And, B. I. N. G. O. BINGO!!! Ryan, you prove time and time again how easily you can be manipulated, by your own ego. You thought you had the answer, and I set you up for it. I knew you would AUTOMATICALLY go with Conservative/Far Right radio answer. Too easy. No, it wasn't a Conservative Radio station. It was a station that definitely leans left, and were talking about what the possible defenses for Trump could be. I happen to listen to all sides points of view with an open mind, unlike you. You should try it with an OPEN MIND sometime, but I'm sure you won't for a variety of reasons. By doing that, which I hadn't before, it has opened my mind to other possibilities and viewpoints that I never would have considered in the past. Even here on this Aztec Political Forum, it's helped me form a view that I never would have considered before. Don't be so predictable Ryan. It's boring.
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Aug 15, 2023 17:48:39 GMT -8
I edited my initial post saying that I know it wasn't rigged, but was just wondering if Trump certainly felt that it was, then is it still a crime to ask to find the rigged votes. You answered my question. Thank you. John, this is what you need to remember. trump was planting the seed "If I lose it's rigged" long before the 2020 election. This guy is the master manipulator. Nothing he does is innocent, or I didn't know. He is the most insidious danger to America in history. He loves conflict and anarchy. Thats how he makes his gains. You think he gives a f x x x about Maui? No it's just a manipulative blame game with him. If half the country killed each other, he wouldn't give a f x x x . Name one time he's apologized, showed empathy, or showed humanity in his life? Cancer, cancer cancer. You're preaching to the choir. I completely agree with you. I was just wondering if what I heard would be a defense for him. Like I've said countless times, I want ANY and ALL corrupt politicians to be dealt with in a court of law.
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Aug 15, 2023 17:54:43 GMT -8
Conservative radio. Gotta love it. And, B I N G O, BINGO!!! Ryan, you prove time and time again how easily you can be manipulated, by your own ego. You thought you had the answer, and I set you up for it. I knew you would AUTOMATICALLY go with Conservative/Far Right radio answer. Too easy. No, it wasn't a Conservative Radio station. It was a station that definitely leans left, and were talking about what the possible defenses for Trump could be. I happen to listen to all sides points of view with an open mind, unlike you. You should try it with an OPEN MIND sometime, but I'm sure you won't for a variety of reasons. By doing that, which I hadn't before, it has opened my mind to other possibilities and viewpoints that I never would have considered in the past. Even here on this Aztec Political Forum, it's helped me form a view that I never would have considered before. Don't be so predictable Ryan. It's boring. Just a bit different when you lend context to it, but, in fairness, Fox and the other conservative outlets have been non-stop with this same line of defense. Not sure what station you were listening to, but if that was floated as an actual defense....I'll assume it was a joke/they didn't read the indictment. The specific incident being referred to is one of the leading events towards Count One of the indictment. It's literally not a legal defense that would be tried in court, as they not only have the audio of the call, they have testimony backing the events leading up to and after the call took place. The only real defense here is to try and get the trial moved to federal court, to try and argue the official capacity of the call and to invoke the constitutionality of the charges themselves. They have more than enough evidence to secure a verdict.
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Aug 15, 2023 18:26:32 GMT -8
And, B I N G O, BINGO!!! Ryan, you prove time and time again how easily you can be manipulated, by your own ego. You thought you had the answer, and I set you up for it. I knew you would AUTOMATICALLY go with Conservative/Far Right radio answer. Too easy. No, it wasn't a Conservative Radio station. It was a station that definitely leans left, and were talking about what the possible defenses for Trump could be. I happen to listen to all sides points of view with an open mind, unlike you. You should try it with an OPEN MIND sometime, but I'm sure you won't for a variety of reasons. By doing that, which I hadn't before, it has opened my mind to other possibilities and viewpoints that I never would have considered in the past. Even here on this Aztec Political Forum, it's helped me form a view that I never would have considered before. Don't be so predictable Ryan. It's boring. Just a bit different when you lend context to it, but, in fairness, Fox and the other conservative outlets have been non-stop with this same line of defense. Not sure what station you were listening to, but if that was floated as an actual defense....I'll assume it was a joke/they didn't read the indictment. The specific incident being referred to is one of the leading events towards Count One of the indictment. It's literally not a legal defense that would be tried in court, as they not only have the audio of the call, they have testimony backing the events leading up to and after the call took place. The only real defense here is to try and get the trial moved to federal court, to try and argue the official capacity of the call and to invoke the constitutionality of the charges themselves. They have more than enough evidence to secure a verdict. Yeah, the person on the radio said that they were hearing that it might be a defense that Trump might use and the interviewer felt that it wouldn't hold up as a defense, but didn't seem certain, so I came on here to ask the question. That simple.
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Aug 15, 2023 18:42:57 GMT -8
Just a bit different when you lend context to it, but, in fairness, Fox and the other conservative outlets have been non-stop with this same line of defense. Not sure what station you were listening to, but if that was floated as an actual defense....I'll assume it was a joke/they didn't read the indictment. The specific incident being referred to is one of the leading events towards Count One of the indictment. It's literally not a legal defense that would be tried in court, as they not only have the audio of the call, they have testimony backing the events leading up to and after the call took place. The only real defense here is to try and get the trial moved to federal court, to try and argue the official capacity of the call and to invoke the constitutionality of the charges themselves. They have more than enough evidence to secure a verdict. Yeah, the person on the radio said that they were hearing that it might be a defense that Trump might use and the interviewer felt that it wouldn't hold up as a defense, but didn't seem certain, so I came on here to ask the question. That simple. It's very similar to the documents case and why they wouldn't try a declassification defense in an actual trial.
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Aug 16, 2023 10:52:12 GMT -8
Trump could face another indictment, this time in Arizona.
|
|